Public Relations

Michael Dugher: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change how much his Department and its associated public bodies spent on (a) external public relations consultants and (b) public affairs consultants, in each of the past three years; and for what purposes such consultants were engaged.

Gregory Barker: The following table shows public relations-type activities expenditure provided for the Department of Energy and Climate Change and its constituent bodies:
	
		
			 £(k) 
			 Period Company 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 
			 Core-DECC Freud(1) — — 350 
			 NDPBs Luther Pendragon(2) 24 24 24 
			 (1) External public relations consultants engaged to carry-out consumer research and marketing for the launch of the ‘Green Deal’ in 2013. (2) External public relations consultants commissioned to provide strategic communications advice.

Travel

Gloria De Piero: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change how much his Department spent on travel for departmental officials in each of the last five years.

Gregory Barker: The Department of Energy and Climate Change's expenditure on travel is shown as follows:
	
		
			  £(k) 
			 2009-10 2,915 
			 2010-11 1,545 
			 2011-12 1,388 
			 2012-13 1,193 
			 Q1 2013-14(1) 161 
			 (1 )Up to 30 June 2013 
		
	
	The figures shown may include an element of subsistence which cannot be separately identified without incurring disproportional cost.

Driving Offences: Disqualification

Rehman Chishti: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice 
	(1)  how many people convicted of driving whilst disqualified had been convicted of the same offence within the previous 10 years in each year since 2000;
	(2)  how many people given a custodial sentence for driving whilst disqualified had been convicted of the same offence within the previous 10 years in each year since 2000;
	(3)  how many people have been given multiple custodial sentences for driving whilst disqualified since 2000.

Jeremy Wright: Sentencing is entirely a matter for our independent courts, which must follow sentencing guidelines. The maximum penalty for driving while disqualified is six months' imprisonment and/or a level 5 fine (£5,000). The offender's licence must also be endorsed and either six penalty points imposed or the offender will be disqualified for a further period. Recent and relevant convictions are a statutory aggravating factor in sentencing and will make the sentence more severe, within the maximum penalty provided for. The court also has a power to deprive the offender of the vehicle used for the purpose of committing the offence.
	Table 1 shows the number of offenders convicted of driving while disqualified in each year since 2000 with previous convictions for the same offence within the previous 10 years.
	
		
			 Table 1: Number of offenders(1) sentenced for driving while disqualified in each year since 2000 and with previous convictions for the same offence within the previous 10 years 
			  Total number of offenders sentenced for driving while disqualified Number of offenders convicted for the same offence within the previous 10 years Percentage 
			 2000 23,464 12,894 55.0 
		
	
	
		
			 2001 25,017 13,796 55.1 
			 2002 27,167 15,115 55.6 
			 2003 31,782 17,693 55.7 
			 2004 30,795 16,922 55.0 
			 2005 27,221 14,699 54.0 
			 2006 23,197 12,235 52.7 
			 2007 19,474 9,838 50.5 
			 2008 15,451 7,695 49.8 
			 2009 12,498 5,897 47.2 
			 2010 9,755 4,374 44.8 
			 2011 8,300 3,666 44.2 
			 2012 7,330 3,107 42.4 
			 (1) Figures are counts of sentence occasions. An individual offender may be counted multiples times if he or she has been sentenced more than once during the period. Source: Ministry of Justice 
		
	
	Table 2 shows the number of offenders sentenced to an immediate custodial sentence for driving while disqualified in each year since 2000 with previous convictions for the same offence within the previous 10 years.
	
		
			 Table 2: Number of offenders(1) sentenced to custody for driving while disqualified in each year since 2000 and have been convicted for the same offence within the previous 10 years. 
			  Total number of offenders given a custodial sentence for driving while disqualified Number of offenders convicted to an immediate custodial sentence for driving while disqualified and have been convicted for the same offence within the previous 10 years Percentage 
			 2000 11,048 8,095 73.3 
			 2001 11,925 8,709 73.0 
			 2002 12,333 9,334 75.7 
			 2003 13,833 10,837 78.3 
			 2004 12,082 9,750 80.7 
			 2005 10,072 8,189 81.3 
			 2006 7,735 6,265 81.0 
			 2007 5,927 4,843 81.7 
			 2008 4,775 3,824 80.1 
			 2009 3,744 2,882 77.0 
			 2010 2,654 2,022 76.2 
			 2011 2,290 1,722 75.2 
			 2012 1,887 1,367 72.4 
			 (1) Figures are counts of sentence occasions. An individual offender may be counted multiples times if he or she has been sentenced more than once during the period. Source: Ministry of Justice 
		
	
	Table 3 shows the number of offenders(1) sentenced for driving while disqualified in each year since 2000 and also shows the number of offenders with multiple immediate custodial sentences given for the same offence over the entire criminal history of the offender, rather than the previous 10 years.
	
		
			 Table 3: Total number of offenders(1) sentenced for driving while disqualified in each year since 2000 with multiple convictions for the same offence where an immediate custodial sentence was given 
			  Total number of offenders sentenced for driving while disqualified Number of offenders with multiple immediate custodial convictions for driving while disqualified Percentage 
			 2000 23,464 8,312 35.4 
			 2001 25,017 8,875 35.5 
			 2002 27,167 9,754 35.9 
			 2003 31,782 11,245 35.4 
			 2004 30,795 10,691 34.7 
			 2005 27,221 8,991 33.0 
			 2006 23,197 7,313 31.5 
			 2007 19,474 5,657 29.0 
			 2008 15,451 4,453 28.8 
			 2009 12,498 3,343 26.7 
			 2010 9,755 2,417 24.8 
			 2011 8,300 2,057 24.8 
			 2012 7,330 1,708 23.3 
			 (1) Figures are counts of sentence occasions. An individual offender may be counted multiples times if he or she has been sentenced more than once during the period. Source: Ministry of Justice 
		
	
	Multiple custodial sentences have been defined as offenders who have more than one custodial sentence over the entire criminal history of the offender; this includes offenders where the current sentence given in each year is not an immediate custodial sentence.
	These figures have been drawn from the police's administrative IT system, the police national computer, which, as with any large scale recording system, is subject to possible errors with data entry and processing. The figures are provisional and subject to change as more information is recorded by the police.

Northallerton Prison

Tom Blenkinsop: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice 
	(1)  how many (a) adult prisoners and (b) young offenders currently in HM Prison-Young Offenders' Institution Northallerton were previously resident in (i) Middlesbrough South and East Cleveland constituency, (ii) the Tees Valley, (iii) the North East and (iv) North Yorkshire;
	(2)  what effect the closure of HM Prison-Young Offenders' Institution Northallerton will have on levels of unemployment in (a) Teesside and (b) North Yorkshire;
	(3)  what assessment he has made of the effect of closing HM Prison-Young Offenders' Institution Northallerton on prison populations in the North East of England;
	(4)  what the (a) operational capacity and (b) current population is of each prison in (i) Yorkshire and Humber and (ii) the North East of England.

Jeremy Wright: The Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice, my right hon. Friend the Member for Epsom and Ewell (Chris Grayling), announced on 4 September 2013 the next steps to modernise the prison estate so that we always have enough prison places for those sentenced by the courts but at much lower cost and in the right places to deliver our ambitions for reducing our stubbornly high reoffending rates.
	The Government is doing this through a significant programme of replacing accommodation which is old, inefficient or has limited long-term strategic value and by reshaping the rest of the prison estate so that we are able to release offenders closer to home which we know improves their resettlement and reduces reoffending.
	Table 1 details the number of adults and young offenders who were held in HM Prison and Young Offender Institution Northallerton on 30 June 2013 who were previously resident in (1) the Middlesbrough South and East Cleveland constituency, (2) the Tees Valley region, which is interpreted as including the four local of authorities of Hartlepool, Middlesbrough, Redcar and Cleveland and Stockton-on-Tees, (3) the North East and (4) North Yorkshire.
	
		
			 Table 1: Data as at 30 June 2013 
			  18-20 21 and over—Adult Total 
			 (1) Middlesbrough South and East Cleveland Constituency 0 2 2 
			 (2) Tees Valley Region(1) 0 11 11 
			 (3) National Offender Management Service (NOMS) North East Region(2) 2 27 29 
			 (4) North Yorkshire 5 40 45 
			 (1) The constituency of Middlesbrough South and East Cleveland is included in the Tees Valley region. Tees Valley region is made up of the four local authorities of Hartlepool, Middlesbrough, Redcar and Cleveland and Stockton- on-Tees. (2) Tees Valley region is included in the NOMS North East Region. 
		
	
	Information on prisoners' residences is provided by prisoners when being processed on arrival into prison and recorded on a central IT system. Addresses can include a home address, an address to which offenders intend to return on discharge or next of kin address and these figures are provided in the answer.
	If no address is given, an offender's committal court address is used as a proxy for the area in which they are resident. These figures are also included in the answer. No address has been recorded and no court information is available for around 3% of all offenders, these figures are excluded from the answer.
	We have successfully managed previous prison closures to avoid compulsory redundancies. We will aim to achieve this again, either through redeploying staff or offering voluntary early departures. The National Offender Management Service (NOMS) will continue to work with the relevant agencies to mitigate the effects of Northallerton's closure.
	The decision to close prisons will only be taken if population levels mean that they can be managed without undermining our ability to hold all those committed to custody by the courts. There is currently unused capacity in the North East and Yorkshire and Humberside regions. NOMS will allocate prisoners currently in Northallerton to other prisons according to their security categorisation, offending behaviour needs and closeness to home.
	Table 2 shows the information for the operational capacity and the prison population of each prison in the NOMS Yorkshire and Humberside region and the NOMS North East region as published on 26 July 2013, which can also be found at:
	https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/prison-population-figures
	
		
			 Table 2: 
			 Region Prison Operational capacity Population 
			 North East Durham 990 873 
			  Deerbolt 513 420 
			  Frankland 808 782 
			  Holme House 1,210 1,083 
			  Kirklevington Grange 283 278 
			  Low Newton 344 272 
			  Northumberland 1,348 1,335 
			 North East total  5,496 5,043 
			     
			 Yorkshire and Humberside Askham Grange 128 99 
			  Doncaster 1,145 1,127 
			  Everthorpe 689 675 
			  Full Sutton 616 588 
			  Hatfield 266 255 
			  Hull 762 745 
			  Leeds 1,212 1,170 
			  Lindholme 930 917 
			  Moorland 1,006 988 
			  New Hall 425 363 
			  Northallerton 252 241 
			  Wakefield 749 737 
			  Weal stun 832 822 
			  Wolds 360 348 
		
	
	
		
			  Wetherby 276 248 
			 Yorkshire and Humberside total  9,648 9,323 
		
	
	All data has been drawn from administrative IT systems, which as with any larger-scale recording system, are subject to possible errors with data entry and processing.

Prisons

Ian Lavery: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what capital expenditure projects his Department commissioned at (a) HMP Blundeston, (b) HMP Dorchester, (c) HMP Northallerton and (d) HMP Reading in each of the last five years; what the cost of each such project was; and if he will make a statement.

Jeremy Wright: The following table shows the centrally-funded capital expenditure projects commissioned at HMP Blundeston, HMP/YOI Dorchester, HMP/YOI Northallerton and HMP/YOI Reading in each of the last five years and their cost. As at 6 September 2013 there have been no projects in those prisons in 2013/14. The total projected maintenance requirements for the four prisons over the next five years would have amounted to £17 million.
	The Department needs to modernise the estate to provide prison capacity at much lower cost and in the right places to deliver our ambition of reducing re-offending. That is why MoJ are replacing older accommodation that is expensive to run with newer, cheaper and more efficient accommodation that will provide better value for money.
	
		
			 Year/Establishment Project title Total (£) 
			 2012/13:   
			 HMP/YOI Dorchester Healthcare Unit 1,823,270 
			 HMP/YOI Reading Fire Alarm Upgrade 1,144,946 
			 2011/12:   
			 None — — 
			 2010/11:   
			 HMP Blundeston Replace Perimeter Intrusion Detection System (PIDS) 1,774,311 
			 HMP/YOI Dorchester New Healthcare (cancelled scheme) 881,454 
			 HMP Blundeston Pipework and pumps 3,417,550 
			 2009/10:   
			 HMP Blundeston Relocation/Expansion of laundry 2,450,457 
			 2008/09:   
			 HMP Blundeston Repair/Replace roofs to B and D wings 420,891 
			 Note: The fire alarm upgrade at Reading began over a year before the decision to close the prison was taken and was initiated on recommendation from a fire safety inspection by the Crown Premises Inspection Group (CPIG). Due to the modular design of the new health care centre at Dorchester, commissioned in August 2011, it will be relocated to another part of the prison estate.

Buildings

Chris Ruane: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many square metres of office space his Department (a) owns and (b) rents in London; and what the value is of that property.

Daniel Poulter: The Department owns/rents the following office space in London:
	
		
			  Square metres Value (£ million) 
			 Office space owned   
			 Richmond House 13,251 46.1 
			 Wellington House 11,232 26.25 
			    
			 Rented   
			 Skipton House 19,924 (1)— 
			 Maple Street 1,719 (1)— 
			 151 Buckingham Palace Road 3,412 (1)— 
			 (1) Not known. 
		
	
	The Department does not hold information on the value of properties it rents.

Buildings

Michael Weir: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what assessment he has made of the number of office relocations made by staff of (a) his Department and (b) his Department's non-departmental public bodies (i) within the original building and (ii) to other buildings in each year since 2009-10; what the cost of (A) removals and (B) refurbishments related to such moves has been; and on how many occasions offices refurbished by his Department in that period have been used by his Department's staff for less than four years before a further move.

Daniel Poulter: As part of the transition to the new health and social care system a number of new organisations were established as part of the Health and Social Care Act 2012. This has required the Department to improve and update its buildings to accommodate these new organisations thus maximising efficiency and effectiveness without purchasing expensive new buildings.
	Refurbishment relates to the general fit out, improvement and provision of furniture and equipment and it is not possible to provide a more detailed breakdown of this expenditure directly related to each relocation without incurring disproportionate cost.
	The Department and its non-departmental public bodies do not hold a complete set of information on the number of office relocations carried out within the original building and to other buildings since 2009-10. Information that is available is detailed as follows. Where known we have provided the actual number of individual moves undertaken.
	
		
			 Department 
			  Office relocations within original building Office relocations to other buildings  
			  Number of relocations Removal costs (£) Refurbishment costs (£) Number of relocations Removal costs (£) Refurbishment costs (£) Number of times refurbishment used for less than four years 
			 2009-10 — — — — — — — 
			 2010-11 — — — — — — — 
			 2011-12 227 — — 16 — — 0 
			 2012-13 1,073 38,177 — 966 53,506 — 0 
		
	
	
		
			 Non-departmental public bodies 
			  Office relocations within original building Office relocations to other buildings  
			  Number of relocations Removal costs (£) Refurbishment costs (£) Number of relocations Removal costs (£) Refurbishment costs (£) Number of times refurbishment used for less than four years 
			 2009-10 (1)3,252 7,298 — — — — 2 
			 2010-11 4,750 — — (2)2 115,473 — 1 
			 2011-12 10,272 — — (2)2 43,809 — 1 
			 2012-13 (3)9,621 72,100 — 1 13,478 — 0 
			 (1 )Figure consists of 3,250 individual staff moves and two bulk moves where the detail of actual number of moves is not known. (2 )Figure relates to bulk moves where the detail of actual staff moved is not known. (3 )Figure consists of 9,618 individual staff moves and three bulk moves where the detail of actual number of moves is not known.